Talk:Kingdom Hearts HD 1.5 Remix

1.5 versus I.5

Should this page be 1.5 or I.5. Serious question, as ReMIX is properly stylized (in the article, but not the page title), it it's more in tune with the numbering system of the series itself (Kingdom Hearts II, not Kingdom Hearts 2) 74.74.131.246 (talk) 05:02, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

I think this is a good consideration, and something to be discussed, because the logo stylizes it as I.5. However, many reliable sources and outlets, even Square Enix's releases, have it stylized as 1.5. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 16:38, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

EU/US/AUS Release

Just wanted to know if we should only have the japan release date? As their is no confirmation of an outside release? 94.1.182.184 (talk) 19:34, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was moved. --BDD (talk) 20:36, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Kingdom Hearts HD 1.5 ReMIX → Kingdom Hearts HD 1.5 Remix – Per WP:LOWERCASE. User Favre1fan93 however insists WP:COMMONNAME. DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 07:28, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Comment: Here are my reasons for common name.

Sources that list it as ReMIX: Official Square Enix site (website title is listed as such), Announcement of NA preorder, with picture listed as such, EU preorder, game page at IGN, listing at GameStop.

Sources that list it as Remix: AU release and preorder, IGN article, Joystiq article, Amazon.com listing, Polygon article, Kotaku's usage of the term.

Through my searches, it seems that each usage is used pretty evenly. In that case, I feel as the official name is, from Square Enix, ReMIX, it is common name. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 14:19, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Compromise suggestion - It looks like the coverage for each is about equal, but looking at the logo, it looks like the game logo is stylized "ReMIX". My suggestion, therefore, is this: can we go with what DragonZero suggests per WP:LOWERCASE, but make the WP:COMMONNAME argument version a redirect to the same page, and mention in the article (stylized as Kingdom Hearts HD 1.5 ReMIX)? Thought I might throw that out there. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...remember the past...} 15:27, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

• Lowercase - per WP:AT. Sergecross73 msg me 15:40, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

• Lowercase title and start the article with Kingdom Hearts HD 1.5 Remix (stylized as...); see Limbo (video game), stylized as LIMBO. --Soetermans. T / C 15:54, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Agree to the compromise suggestion. However, it should be noted as: Kingdom Hearts HD 1.5 Remix (stylized as Kingdom Hearts HD I.5 ReMIX) (The 1.5 as I.5) - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:01, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

• Remix & 1.5, with lede indicating "stylized as I.5 ReMIX"; also make the alternative styles redirects. :) ·Salvidrim!· ✉ 17:12, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Stylized in article

I see the move has happened - no problem with that. The question is, within the article, can we refer to the game as Kingdom Hearts HD 1.5 ReMIX, or should it be referred in article, as it appears in the title? If the latter, then it will need to be changed in other Kingdom Hearts articles, but we should be consistant throughout. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:49, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

It should never have been stylized as a common term. It'll have to be changed if its hanging around somewhere. DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 05:01, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

I think Kingdom Hearts, Kingdom Hearts (video game), Kingdom Hearts: Chain of Memories and Kingdom Hearts 358/2 Days would be the places where it would still be stylized as ReMIX. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 05:05, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

What are you referring to as the "common term" DragonZero? HD 1.5 ReMIX or HD 1.5 Remix? After rereading your comment, I was uncertain. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:47, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Oops, I mean the game's stylized text shouldn't be used as the common term in articles to refer to it. DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 20:31, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

All uses of "ReMIX" have been changed to "Remix" on all the pages listed above. The KH template was changed before so that is all set. There may be other instances of ReMIX floating around, so just be on the look out for them. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 21:22, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

I looked at "What links here" and found any other traces of ReMIX and have changed those as well. Everything should be all set now. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 02:26, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Requested move 2

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Favonian (talk) 09:42, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

---

Kingdom Hearts HD 1.5 Remix → Kingdom Hearts HD 1.5 ReMIX – You guys have got it all wrong and I'm not even sure how. The logo is unhelpful. That's not a capital letter i, but a 1 that vaguely resembles such, as per every single official and unofficial source ever. By the way, if someone were to figure out that it was a capital letter i in the font used, it would still be irrelevant because the logo is unhelpful and is not what has actually been written down. And did you guys even read WP:LOWERCASE? There is nothing in there that talks about parts of titles being intentionally capitalized, except an extremely vague nod to COMMONNAME as always (which "ReMIX" may as well be by this point, though you guys are trying your hardest to ruin it!). The best you'll get is "The initial letter of a title is almost always capitalized by default; otherwise, words are not capitalized unless they would be so in running text." Guess what "ReMIX" is! You're gonna have to find another guideline to lawyer with, and for God's sake, find something that actually seems complicated. Seriously, stop making things up, please; you are creating cracks within Wikipedia for absolutely no reason. It's hard not to be angry about this when fellow editors are basically ruining the internet and everything that stems from it! Despatche (talk) 19:24, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Trademarks. "Trademarks should be written in a way that follows standard English text formatting and capitalization rules." DragonZero (Talk · Contribs) 21:49, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose the Proposer missed the WP:MOSTM as well as the WP:MOSCAPS both of which go against their case. Also I don't think accusations like ruing the internet or lawyering rules is going to get much traction. Granted WP:AT (mentioned in the last move) was clearly not the best choice of guideline here but these two are far more relevant and are the ones that are more regularly invoked in cases of this nature.--64.229.164.69 (talk) 22:40, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Taking a closer look I now believe that when people were quoting WP:AT for lowercase they were talking about WP:TITLETM (far more relevant) not WP:LOWERCASE--64.229.164.69 (talk) 22:44, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose per DragonZero and IP 64.229... - Favre1fan93 (talk) 20:49, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Kingdom Hearts HD 1.5 Remix/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: ProtoDrake (talk · contribs) 05:04, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

I'll have the review ready in a few day's time. --ProtoDrake (talk) 05:04, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Review

Initial Comments

• The lead doesn't need exact release dates. Reccomend rephrasing it to "First revealed in 2012, it released in Japan in March 2013 and in the West in September the same year".
  •  Done
• The lead lacks any kind of information regarding its development, and its emphasis on the later collections seems too high.
  •  Done. Let me know what you think of the new lead.
• Recommend renaming "Games" to "Content".
  •  Maybe I feel like "Games" is a better header than "Content".
    • This isn't essential. It can be left as is.
• Development section needlessly repeats information from the Release section. Either properly distribute the information, or merge the two into a "Development and Release" section. The latter might be preferable, given the low use of development information in the section.
  • I've reduced the repetition in the development of the release date. I think both should be two separate headings still.
• GameRankings shouldn't be used here. It's a seventh-gen games, and I believe there was an agreement not to use GR for anything later than sixth gen.
  •  Done
• Main reception paragraph should be broken into two paragraphs.
  •  Done
• I would rename "Additional Collections" to "Later Collections".
  •  Maybe Not overly opposed to this, but might have to think on it a bit because I'm not feeling that's the best change at this time.
    • I'm alright with leaving it as is if you think it's better that way.

Those are my initial thoughts on the review. I'll be back with more detailed stuff once the items above are addressed or explained. --ProtoDrake (talk) 09:30, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

I've added responses above to your comments. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:22, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

I've had another look through, and I'd be willing to give this a Pass, now the main issues have been addressed. --ProtoDrake (talk) 18:16, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks ProtoDrake! - Favre1fan93 (talk) 04:19, 3 July 2016 (UTC)